Maybe there’s something in the water now, or there was in 2008, but there seems to be a case of retroactive Romney Fever among conservatives who now think the former Massachusetts governor is the bastard offspring of Phil Donahue and Howard Zinn. The latest victim is conservative megastar Rush Limbaugh, who emphatically declared on Wednesday that “Mitt Romney is not a conservative,” but who, in 2008, said he embodied “all three legs of the conservative stool.”

That’s a hell of an endorsement, coming from a guy who knows conservative stool better than anyone. Now, though, Limbaugh not only says Romney isn’t a conservative, he says it over and over. “Romney is not a conservative. He’s not, folks. You can argue with me all day long on that, but he isn’t….He’s a fine guy. He’s very nice gentleman. He is a gentleman. But he’s not a conservative.”

What changed? The reasons Limbaugh now gives for Romney’s un-stooliness are all things that were true in 2008, when he said Mitt was the embodiment of conservatism.

In 2008, Republicans were faced with a choice between Romney, Sen. John McCain, and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, so Rush can surely argue, like others, that this was a case of putting lipstick on a pig, but then it’s fair to ask which Rush can the Dittoheads trust? Ironic, isn’t it?

As a liberal, I know from holding your nose in the ballot box, I did it in 2004. Rush and co. may be happier with the field this year than they were then, but there’s a big difference between “He’s the best candidate available,” and “(he) embodies all three legs of the conservative stool.”